In the UK if you talk about the Avengers it means something different from the Marvel comic. Everyone associates it with Steed and Mrs Peel - hence why it was renamed. The average moviegoer over here doesn't even know there is a Marvel team by that name. For all intents and purposes it is seen as just a big team up event movie. You can doubt all you like, but just ask any non comic fan over here.

I wasn't talking about the UK I was specifically referring to you saying "a lot" of people aren't aware in the US the team is called "Avengers". That's like saying people don't know the X-Men are called the 'X-Men'.

We're working under the assumption that TA2 pits them against Thanos, obviously. And if Thanos is the Big Bad for TA2, there's simply no way you could introduce him and the characters (good and bad) surrounding him in GOTG in 2014, then have him show up again less than a year later and not have the Guardians referenced again. They don't have to take up a lot of face time; this *is* an Avengers film, after all. But they should certainly be part of the proceedings in helping the Avengers find the Mad Titan's achilles heel.

Without the Guardians in play, the Avengers would be flying blind against Thanos.

Not if Iron Man goes up to space and encounters him, before returning to Earth for TA2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

You're right, this is a movie, and that's why a dozen heroes works. If they were trying to go for a straight up adaptation of the comics then this movie would have at least 2 dozen heroes in it; instead they're going for a smaller, tighter event. I've already explain why having the Guardians in the film would work.

A dozen heroes doesn't work. Sorry. Even a half-dozen heroes led to Hawkeye not getting much characterization in the first film.

Audiences want more interplay between the Avengers themselves, not The Avengers: The Last Stand featuring 2 minute non-roles for a bunch of characters that were in the previous movies and a few characters that weren't

They already did it on EMH. Mar-Vell was a SHIELD scientist and Carol was assisting him. That entire storyline is basically a blueprint for what should happen with the SHIELD show. Since they're not going to directly interact with the Avengers or their villains, having SHIELD investigate a possible Kree threat is a perfect storyline to bring a new Avenger into the fold. Plus, Whedon already said he wants more females on the team in A2. Ms. Marvel is the best bet.

Not if Iron Man goes up to space and encounters him, before returning to Earth for TA2

I don't see how this solves anything.

Quote:

A dozen heroes doesn't work. Sorry. Even a half-dozen heroes led to Hawkeye not getting much characterization in the first film.

Audiences want more interplay between the Avengers themselves, not The Avengers: The Last Stand featuring 2 minute non-roles for a bunch of characters that were in the previous movies and a few characters that weren't

Wow, you just compared a dozen relavent characters to almost over 2 dozen that were in Last Stand, many of which were not only heroes but villains and had nothing to do intimately with the plot, which itself didn't have nearly as much development as the plot coming in A2 will have had. Your argument lost all credibility right there. Don't compare something like this to Last Stand if you want to make a legitimate argument.

What we're talking about with A2 is a movie that will have a good 12 or so heroes with one specific villain in Thanos. All of those characters will be relavent to the plot, which was built up over the course of several films, and don't all require to be the main focus of the entire film. Will some characters have to take a back seat to others? Yes, but that's not inherently a problem. Hawkeye is considered to have been shafted because he had no prior development to his involvement in Avengers whatsoever, and even he at least got his two moments in the film. Unlike Hawkeye, every single character will have had their time to shine in their own movies besides the Hulk and Hawkeye, and some characters like Groot and Rocket Racoon need no focus at all, and other like Drax and Gamora don't need any until they're actually confronting Thanos. It works, you're just not thinking very thoroughly about how it could because you're stuck on the knee-jerk reaction of "Last Stand and Spider-Man 3" when you here a movie involves more than 5 characters.

You use "interplay" as an argument but it doesn't hold in the slightest. By interplay you probably mean the group dynamics, but you don't have to have a film focused completely around that aspect to get it across. This movie will be just as much about the conflicts outside the team that tear them apart as it will be about their "interplay". And again, you don't have to intimately focus on every single character on the team to get the group nuances across.

Not if Iron Man goes up to space and encounters him, before returning to Earth for TA2

Unless IM winds up spending the better part of the GOTG movie as a guest star (god forbid; but the current issue of GOTG #1 in comics makes one wonder), then he's not going to be armed with any useful information or weapons or tools to use against Thanos.

Quote:

A dozen heroes doesn't work. Sorry. Even a half-dozen heroes led to Hawkeye not getting much characterization in the first film.

No, the fact that Hawkeye was unnecessarily mind****ed by Loki for over half of his scenes (for no purpose whatsoever) led to him not getting much characterization in the first film. Had he been given the same amount of time he actually had in the movie, but doing something useful as an actual hero and Avenger instead of as a Loki Zombie, he would've had ample time for a richer characterization and interplay.

Quote:

Audiences want more interplay between the Avengers themselves, not The Avengers: The Last Stand featuring 2 minute non-roles for a bunch of characters that were in the previous movies and a few characters that weren't

Mr. Dent said it better than I could. It's not the amount of heroes who are in a movie; it's the quality of their dialogue and characterization that makes them memorable. The Dirty Dozen did just fine, as did the Ocean's Eleven (Plus) films, The Wild Bunch, and other ensemble casts.

In the UK if you talk about the Avengers it means something different from the Marvel comic. Everyone associates it with Steed and Mrs Peel - hence why it was renamed. The average moviegoer over here doesn't even know there is a Marvel team by that name. For all intents and purposes it is seen as just a big team up event movie. You can doubt all you like, but just ask any non comic fan over here.

1. Unless IM winds up spending the better part of the GOTG movie as a guest star (god forbid; but the current issue of GOTG #1 in comics makes one wonder), then he's not going to be armed with any useful information or weapons or tools to use against Thanos.

2. No, the fact that Hawkeye was unnecessarily mind****ed by Loki for over half of his scenes (for no purpose whatsoever) led to him not getting much characterization in the first film. Had he been given the same amount of time he actually had in the movie, but doing something useful as an actual hero and Avenger instead of as a Loki Zombie, he would've had ample time for a richer characterization and interplay.

3. Mr. Dent said it better than I could. It's not the amount of heroes who are in a movie; it's the quality of their dialogue and characterization that makes them memorable. The Dirty Dozen did just fine, as did the Ocean's Eleven (Plus) films, The Wild Bunch, and other ensemble casts.

1.Information, sure. We don't have to watch him learn stuff for him to have learned said stuff if he's in space for a while.

I don't really want a super awesome deus ex machina weapon that can defeat Thanos at the last second, I'm sure you don't either if you really think about it. Whether it comes from Iron Man or the Guardians or Squirrel Girl. Don't want.

2. Whedon said he gave Hawkeye the mind****ing subplot because the original, fleshed out story he gave Hawkeye left the script too long. Because there was too much to cover between 5 heroes and Nick Fury and Loki. Doubling that doesn't help.

3. It is the amount of heroes who are in the movie, when your characters are witty superheroes that the audience likes who are played by famous actors that didn't sign on to these movies so they could each have 6 lines of dialogue.

These characters aren't the Ocean's cast. Outside of Clooney, Pitt and Damon those characters were all caricatures who had a couple of funny scenes. And that's fine for those movies. I don't imagine Scarlett Johansson and Mark Ruffalo will be happy under those circumstances. Audiences, who liked the first movie specifically because the characters were so fully realized and characterized and explored, certainly won't be.

1.Information, sure. We don't have to watch him learn stuff for him to have learned said stuff if he's in space for a while.

I don't really want a super awesome deus ex machina weapon that can defeat Thanos at the last second, I'm sure you don't either if you really think about it. Whether it comes from Iron Man or the Guardians or Squirrel Girl. Don't want.

2. Whedon said he gave Hawkeye the mind****ing subplot because the original, fleshed out story he gave Hawkeye left the script too long. Because there was too much to cover between 5 heroes and Nick Fury and Loki. Doubling that doesn't help.

3. It is the amount of heroes who are in the movie, when your characters are witty superheroes that the audience likes who are played by famous actors that didn't sign on to these movies so they could each have 6 lines of dialogue.

These characters aren't the Ocean's cast. Outside of Clooney, Pitt and Damon those characters were all caricatures who had a couple of funny scenes. And that's fine for those movies. I don't imagine Scarlett Johansson and Mark Ruffalo will be happy under those circumstances. Audiences, who liked the first movie specifically because the characters were so fully realized and characterized and explored, certainly won't be.

Yeah, I'd like to hear that, too. I loved the Avengers, and god bless Joss Whedon and all, but he simply dicked over Hawkeye, and it sounds like he's making excuses. "I wanted to make a cool story arc for your character, Renner, but it would take too long, so I'm just going to make you a mindless zombie slave to the villain for half the movie instead. Isn't that better?"

In the original script, there was a beautiful backstory for Hawkeye and he was on the team from the beginning. Unfortunately, their simply wasn’t enough time to put it into the story, so the brainwashing plotline was created to give Renner something interesting to play with the character. Whedon was pretty sad that they couldn’t do more. He also never got tired of watching Hawkeye shoot things while looking the other way.

Yeah, I'd like to hear that, too. I loved the Avengers, and god bless Joss Whedon and all, but he simply dicked over Hawkeye, and it sounds like he's making excuses. "I wanted to make a cool story arc for your character, Renner, but it would take too long, so I'm just going to make you a mindless zombie slave to the villain for half the movie instead. Isn't that better?"

Well if he had a 300 page script and had to cut something it's not really an excuse, more of an unfortunate reality about the constraints of film

I thought it was a fine intro to Hawky, and as long as we get a better look at him in this movie it's a non-issue.

Well if he had a 300 page script and had to cut something it's not really an excuse, more of an unfortunate reality about the constraints of film

I thought it was a fine intro to Hawky, and as long as we get a better look at him in this movie it's a non-issue.

Constraints be damned. If Hawkeye had all of, what 15 minutes' screen time in Avengers (seriously, somebody counted), and about 10 of those were spent under Loki's spell, Joss screwed up. The only one Loki needed was Selvig; he didn't need Hawkeye. Those 10 minutes could've then been spent on Hawkeye doing Hawkeye-ish and Avenger-ish things, and Clint would've had at least *a little* more of a presence.

Constraints be damned. If Hawkeye had all of, what 15 minutes' screen time in Avengers (seriously, somebody counted), and about 10 of those were spent under Loki's spell, Joss screwed up. The only one Loki needed was Selvig; he didn't need Hawkeye. Those 10 minutes could've then been spent on Hawkeye doing Hawkeye-ish and Avenger-ish things, and Clint would've had at least *a little* more of a presence.

Yes, but then we wouldn't have been treated to COMPUTER HACKING ARROWS and the world would be a lesser place because of it.

__________________

"That was the edge Parker had; he knew that survival was more important than heroics. It isn't how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose.”
~ Richard Stark, Deadly Edge

Constraints be damned. If Hawkeye had all of, what 15 minutes' screen time in Avengers (seriously, somebody counted), and about 10 of those were spent under Loki's spell, Joss screwed up. The only one Loki needed was Selvig; he didn't need Hawkeye. Those 10 minutes could've then been spent on Hawkeye doing Hawkeye-ish and Avenger-ish things, and Clint would've had at least *a little* more of a presence.

And then both Widow and Hawkeye's specific emotional motivations in regards to both Loki and the third act battle aren't as neatly and cleanly explained to the audience.

Look, I love Hawkeye. He's my favorite Avenger from the comics. But that storyline worked for the movie and the characters. As long as we get sassy douchebag Hawkeye this time around I don't see the issue.

I honestly have no idea why anyone thinks all of the Guardians will be showing up here. It makes a heck of a lot more sense to introduce a single new character in Avengers 2 than in does to take a half dozen characters from the Guardians movie and stuff them into Avengers 2.

This is a movie, not a comic. It's a major disservice both to this film and those characters to shove them all in this movie, instead of allowing the Avengers themselves time to continue to grow and develop as an ensemble.

I like the idea of Thanos being introduced before The Avengers 2, but I don't want the Guardians in the film, and I think you're right.

I think having Stark meet up with the Guardians in the end of GOTG will be a sufficient way to keep the GOTG out of sight for TA2. It actually works really nicely. For people unfamiliar with the solo films, going from the first movie to the sequel it wouldn't come as much of a surprise that Stark went space exploring between the two films and during his travels had learned of Thanos.

Then I suggest you follow your own advice, while you're busy advising me to follow mine.

That makes no sense. I didn't give you a protip on how to debate me, I said if you didn't want to debate then don't reply. Very simple concept. Instead of trying to defend someone who is capable of doing so themselves you should stay on topic and reply to the issue at hand that started the debate, which Chewy was not able to adequately argue his point for.